UNITED NATIONS
PRESS RELEASE
Statement to the Security Council
by Adama Dieng, United Nations Special Adviser on the Prevention of Genocide, on his
visit to South Sudan
New York, 17 November 2016
Excellencies, Ladies and Gentlemen,
Thank you for the invitation to brief the Security Council on my visit to South Sudan last week.
I decided to go to South Sudan due to growing concern at recent developments there, including
reports of violence targeting multiple ethnic groups. This violence is taking place against the
background of the breakdown in the political process and a stalling in the implementation of the
peace agreement.
The aim of my visit was to carry out an assessment of the situation from the perspective of my
mandate in order to better understand the landscape of ethnically-fuelled violence – including
hate speech and incitement to violence – and the risk that this violence could lead to further
atrocity crimes, including genocide.
In the course of the week I met with United Nations colleagues, senior government officials,
civil society groups, religious leaders, community members and diplomatic representatives in
Juba. I visited a “protection of civilians” site in Juba and travelled to Yei town in Yei River
State to meet with members of the community and government. Yei, which until recently had
been spared the violence seen in other areas, has now been identified as a conflict “hot spot” with
escalating violence against multiple tribal groups in Yei and in the Central Equatorian State, of
which Yei River State is a part. The perpetrators of this violence are varied and reportedly
include the Sudan People’s Liberation Army (SPLA), the SPLA in Opposition, unidentified
armed groups, militia, armed groups and bandits.
I would like to take this opportunity to thank SRSG Løj for the excellent support provided by
UNMISS for my visit and express my appreciation to the Transitional Government of National
Unity for facilitating the visit and for its cooperation while I was there.
That being said, as I reported last week, I was dismayed that what I saw and heard in South
Sudan confirmed my concerns that there is a strong risk of violence escalating along ethnic lines,
with the potential for genocide. I do not say that lightly. As the Secretary-General highlighted in
his report, there are a myriad of underlying risk factors, which in my assessment provide an
environment ripe for the commission of mass atrocities.
First, in addition to the loss of life and trauma, the violence has an ever-increasing economic
cost, both domestically and internationally. It is causing a drain on much-needed resources for
development and humanitarian assistance. The Government is reportedly half of the national
budget on security. There will be neither growth nor development in South Sudan if it continues.
The economy has stagnated, inflation is very high and the population is becoming increasingly
desperate.
The political and security crisis that resulted from the July 2016 violence was fresh in the minds
of those with whom I spoke, and many referred to the potential for a further deterioration of the
security situation in the coming dry season, when movement around the country would be easier.
Reports from the field indicate continual security incidents and the arming, recruitment and
training of both the SPLA and SPLA/IO.
As the Security Council has noted, we have seen patterns of human rights violations and abuses
committed mainly by SPLA soldiers, police officers and members of the National Security
Service, as well as by SPLA/IO and militia groups. These violations have not been addressed.
There has been widespread impunity and lack of accountability for violations, including those
committed in the name of counter-insurgency. Civil society organizations have been directly
targeted, as have human rights defenders and journalists. Some have been killed and many others
have fled the country out of fear for their safety.
Many people with whom I spoke referred to an amorphous and undisciplined army that was
formed out of what had once been two opposing forces. They have now splintered into multiple
armed groups, criminal gangs and bandits, over which the Government is failing to exercise
control. Some of these groups are formed along ethnic lines, and pursuing their own objectives.
In speaking to people, I heard of tremendous mistrust between the civilian population and the
military. The population no longer seems to view the military as their protector, but rather as an
entity to be feared – or to be joined as one of the few potential employers. One elder I met
summed up the current ethnic polarization: he said that he could see fear in the eyes of some, and
enthusiasm in the eyes of others.
There is a serious and protracted humanitarian crisis and widespread, prolonged displacement of
populations – both internally and to neighbouring countries. In some cases displacement has
caused the disruption of agricultural activities and food insecurity.
Despite this crisis, the Government and non-State armed groups continues to hinder access by
the humanitarian and human rights community. While aid agencies continue to deliver assistance
to people in need across the country, at times there is outright obstruction of the delivery of
services and support to people in need.
The scarcity of resources has contributed to divisions within society. Instead of the development
of a South Sudanese national identity, we are seeing extreme polarization of some ethnic groups,
which has increased in certain places since the outbreak of violence in July this year and the
disintegration of the peace process. Some groups shared with me their feelings of betrayal, and a
perception that the SPLA is increasingly ethnically homogenous, composed mostly of Dinka
2
members, and has been “ethnicized” as part of a wider plan to launch systematic attacks against
ethnic Nuer and multiple tribal groups which make up the Equatorias. At the same time, there
were a number of incidents last month that specifically targeted Dinkas.
Inflammatory rhetoric, stereotyping and name calling have been accompanied by threats,
targeted killings and rape of members of particular ethnic groups, and by violent attacks against
individuals or communities on the basis of their perceived political affiliation. Especially
worrying was a statement issued by President Kiir on 19 October in which he said he would
personally lead military operations against the armed groups responsible for killings in the
Equatorias.
I visited Yei River State, and I was shocked by what I found. Yei had previously been spared the
violence seen elsewhere but has suffered the consequences of the July violence, when the SPLA
pursued Riek Machar and his supporters through the Equatorias into the Democratic Republic of
Congo.
Recent reports detail the expulsion of farmers from their land into Yei town. UNHCR reported
that 100,000 people were trapped in Yei at the end of September. Many farmers have lost their
homes and belongings, livestock and land. Property has been looted and villages have been
burned. I heard reports of targeted killings, assault, maiming, mutilation, rape, and the barbarous
use of machetes to hack families to death.
When I visited, there was widespread fear among the population. One person told me in
desperation, “Tonight I don’t know what will happen to me.” An elder expressed terror that his
community would be “finished.” And Yei is just one location among many that are experiencing
this kind of violence. Despite the challenges it faces, the United Nations system has been
monitoring signs of increased conflict potential in other areas of Central Equatorian State, as
well as those in Western and Eastern Equatorian States, Western Bahr El Ghazal, Upper Nile,
Unity, and Jonglei. However, there is much that we do not know.
The media, including social media, are being used to spread hatred and encourage ethnic
polarization, and letters threatening particular ethnic groups, telling them to leave, face violence
or be eliminated from specific areas, have surfaced in the last month. I am particularly worried
by the involvement of the youth, who make up a large percentage of the population and who are
particularly susceptible to divisions within society. I was also informed by a number of people
that the South Sudanese diaspora has been playing an influential, at times negative, role in
spreading hatred and inciting violence.
There is a range of different perpetrators and victims, which makes an assessment of the risk of
atrocity crimes in South Sudan more complex. But the warning signs are there. Throughout my
visit, conversations with all actors confirmed that what began as a political conflict has
transformed into what could become an outright ethnic war. With the stalling of the
implementation of the peace agreement; the current, worsening, humanitarian crisis; a stagnating
economy and the proliferation of arms, all of the ingredients exist for a dangerous escalation of
violence. There is both motivation and the means.
I must emphasize that genocide is a process. It does not happen overnight. And because it is a
process and one that takes time to prepare, it can be prevented. The political leadership of South
Sudan has the primary responsibility to protect its populations and must be held to this
responsibility. Action can and must be taken now to address some of the factors that could
provide fertile ground for genocide.
My intention in briefing you is to provide impetus for preventive action. We have a collective
responsibility to protect populations in South Sudan from genocide, war crimes, ethnic cleansing
and crimes against humanity.
Bearing this in mind, it is highly desirable that the Security Council consider the following
options which, if implemented could reduce the risk of atrocity crimes:
-
First, while I commend the Security Council for your strong condemnation of ethnicallyfueled violence and hate speech, the Council should continue to insist on preventing further
incitement to discrimination, hostility, and hatred that could lead to more violence.
-
The Security Council could publicly call for the political leadership of South Sudan to
immediately condemn and take steps to prevent any act of discrimination, hostility, and
hatred that could constitute incitement to violence.
-
The Security Council could specifically request that UNMISS monitor, investigate and report
on all incidents of hate speech and incitement to violence, and be provided full access by the
Government of South Sudan to do so.
-
All support should be given to UNMISS to carry out all the Mission’s mandated tasks, in
particularly tasks that relate to the protection of civilians and human rights monitoring, which
could contribute to preventing future violence. The Government should be pressed to ensure
that freedom of movement is granted to all United Nations personnel, both civilians and
military, to conduct patrols, investigate and report on incidents, and conduct community
based conflict prevention and resolution initiatives.
-
The Security Council could consider requesting the Panel of Experts on South Sudan to
investigate and report on the individuals who are inciting violence, responsible for targeted
ethnic killings, and propagating hate speech, as well as incitement to violence by the
diaspora.
-
Given the current scenario, it is urgent that the Security Council impose an arms embargo.
The proliferation of arms is devastating and this could have an important impact.
-
Similarly, the sanctions regime should not be limited to a few individuals; freezing of assets
and restrictions of movement of offenders should be imposed more widely. South Sudan’s
top officials have benefited both financially and politically from the war, and could not
maintain the status quo without the free flow of funds and arms into the country. There is a
known system of international banks, businesses, weapons traders, and intermediaries which
has contributed to the perpetuation to the conflict through their dealings, and the Security
Council has the power to influence this system.
4
-
The Security Council should continue to stress the importance of an inclusive political
process accompanied by a cessation of hostilities. If some sectors of the population continue
to feel excluded from participation, there is little incentive for them to pursue peace.
-
Until the formal peace process is reinstated, there is much that can be done in terms of
facilitating dialogue. What surfaced over and over in my discussions last week was the
presence of long-standing anger, combined with misconceptions and preconceived notions.
These need to be addressed if there is to be a chance of peace. All the actors with whom I
met stressed that there was an urgent need to engage in both community and national level
dialogue and I was encouraged by their eagerness to engage in such processes. Community
and religious leaders, provincial level authorities, and UNMISS colleagues shared
experiences of efforts to promote communication. These efforts should be supported by the
international community. Once there is greater stability and redoubling of efforts for
dialogue, I urge the establishment of the commission truth, healing and reconciliation by the
Government foreseen in the peace agreement.
-
Beyond reconciliation, justice and accountability were common themes in my discussions
with the people of South Sudan. Even as the conflict becomes more complex, the effects of
the December 2013 outbreak of violence and subsequent violence linger, and human rights
violations committed during the last few years have not been adequately documented or
accounted for. I welcome the commitment of the signatories of the peace agreement to
establish a hybrid court to prosecute cases of genocide, crimes against humanity and war
crimes, as well as well as other serious crimes under international law.
-
I hope that the Council’s discussions with national authorities and with the African Union
may move these plans forward. In the interim, I urge the Security Council to call for the
establishment of an investigation mechanism that would collect and preserve evidence that
could later provide evidence to national or international courts. This would help in assessing
the full scale of violations and track patterns in violence.
-
Finally, while the State has the primary responsibility to protect its populations, other States,
regional organisations and the international community can assist its protection efforts.
Indeed, neighbouring countries have an intrinsic interest in doing so. The involvement of
neighbouring countries in domestic conflicts with resulting spill-over beyond national
borders has occurred in Democratic Republic of Congo and Somalia, to name a few.
-
Regional action needs to be reinvigorated. African leaders must coalesce around a unified
strategy to prevent an escalation of violence. Given the different regional interests and
allegiances of the political leadership in South Sudan, any political strategy must be endorsed
by all national actors if it is to succeed. The Security Council should strengthen its
cooperation with the African Union Peace and Security Council and relevant actors within
IGAD in order to move this process forward.
Last week, I saw all the signs that ethnic hatred and targeting of civilians could evolve into
genocide if something is not done now to stop it. I urge the Security Council and Members
States of the region to be united, and to take action. Thank you.